Smoking bans...

[Tab]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre
I think the most dangerous thing second-hand smoke has ever done is cause people to lose respect for the ideals and beliefs of freedom and property rights.

The ideas of freedom were once something highly respected, something praised, held on a pedestal, something worth more than life itself. Something a terrorist with a bomb, nor a man with a gun, could take away. Rights that were inalienable.

But here we live in a time when people are so scared of death, they forget how to live. They don't know what living means anymore. As if its nothing more than being able to breathe air and pump blood.

If people are willing to toss away the beliefs and ideals that once made the USA great because of something so insignificant and so irrelevant as second-hand smoke, then I declare this country dead. Beat it, beat it now, beat it until its dead, beat it until I can't hear its cries anymore.

I love how people always attempt some high and mighty arguments about their "inalienable freedoms". No one, I repeat NO ONE is telling you you're not allowed to smoke anymore. We're simply saying don't make me smoke along with you.

It's no different than having quiet hours after 10pm on weekdays... you can still blast your music, just not when most people want to sleep

If you want to take away my right to smoke in a bar, I'll fight to take away your right to go to bars.

Oh, wait, you don't have the right to go to a bar.

If you can guarantee that your smoke won't go anywhere else but yourself, you can smoke at the bar all you want. For a libertarian, you really lack that whole "your rights end where mine start" concept.

No. The problem is NOT with me.

You fail to realize two things. One, the owner of the bar has the right to decide whether or not to allow his customers to smoke. And, two, you do NOT have the right to go to any bar you want to. If you don't believe me, go to a popular bar in LA, wait in line to get in, and watch the bouncer tell you that you are too ugly or aren't dressed "correctly" to come into the bar.

My stance on this issue is very much in step with Libertarian belief.

Hardly,
try having a bar with "whites only" policy and see how quick you'll settle with the AG.
linkie

The same argument can be made for employers or housing providers and it's equally void. You don't have a full say into who you can or cannot bar from employing/dwelling.

BTW people that sympathize with Ron Paul are a bunch of misguided libertopians that lack in the Economics & Policy departments... hardly true Libertarians.

Define Libertarian please.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre
I think the most dangerous thing second-hand smoke has ever done is cause people to lose respect for the ideals and beliefs of freedom and property rights.

The ideas of freedom were once something highly respected, something praised, held on a pedestal, something worth more than life itself. Something a terrorist with a bomb, nor a man with a gun, could take away. Rights that were inalienable.

But here we live in a time when people are so scared of death, they forget how to live. They don't know what living means anymore. As if its nothing more than being able to breathe air and pump blood.

If people are willing to toss away the beliefs and ideals that once made the USA great because of something so insignificant and so irrelevant as second-hand smoke, then I declare this country dead. Beat it, beat it now, beat it until its dead, beat it until I can't hear its cries anymore.

I love how people always attempt some high and mighty arguments about their "inalienable freedoms". No one, I repeat NO ONE is telling you you're not allowed to smoke anymore. We're simply saying don't make me smoke along with you.

It's no different than having quiet hours after 10pm on weekdays... you can still blast your music, just not when most people want to sleep

So, when you come over to MY bar are you going to ask me to turn down the music?

Shot and a miss... I will tell you turn your music down if you're in a residential zoned area and are blasting music past 10pm. Google "noise violations" ...

What's the difference between loud music in a bar and smoking in a bar?

The analogy was loud music in a residential area versus smoking at a bar. Both are nuisance to the people that aren't doing it, yet have to endure it anyhow. Once has been regulated, the other is in the process of being regulated.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre
I think the most dangerous thing second-hand smoke has ever done is cause people to lose respect for the ideals and beliefs of freedom and property rights.

The ideas of freedom were once something highly respected, something praised, held on a pedestal, something worth more than life itself. Something a terrorist with a bomb, nor a man with a gun, could take away. Rights that were inalienable.

But here we live in a time when people are so scared of death, they forget how to live. They don't know what living means anymore. As if its nothing more than being able to breathe air and pump blood.

If people are willing to toss away the beliefs and ideals that once made the USA great because of something so insignificant and so irrelevant as second-hand smoke, then I declare this country dead. Beat it, beat it now, beat it until its dead, beat it until I can't hear its cries anymore.

I love how people always attempt some high and mighty arguments about their "inalienable freedoms". No one, I repeat NO ONE is telling you you're not allowed to smoke anymore. We're simply saying don't make me smoke along with you.

It's no different than having quiet hours after 10pm on weekdays... you can still blast your music, just not when most people want to sleep

So, when you come over to MY bar are you going to ask me to turn down the music?

Shot and a miss... I will tell you turn your music down if you're in a residential zoned area and are blasting music past 10pm. Google "noise violations" ...

What's the difference between loud music in a bar and smoking in a bar?

The analogy was loud music in a residential area versus smoking at a bar. Both are nuisance to the people that aren't doing it, yet have to endure it anyhow. Once has been regulated, the other is in the process of being regulated.

Well, I am talking about loud music in a bar. What's the difference?

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre
I think the most dangerous thing second-hand smoke has ever done is cause people to lose respect for the ideals and beliefs of freedom and property rights.

The ideas of freedom were once something highly respected, something praised, held on a pedestal, something worth more than life itself. Something a terrorist with a bomb, nor a man with a gun, could take away. Rights that were inalienable.

But here we live in a time when people are so scared of death, they forget how to live. They don't know what living means anymore. As if its nothing more than being able to breathe air and pump blood.

If people are willing to toss away the beliefs and ideals that once made the USA great because of something so insignificant and so irrelevant as second-hand smoke, then I declare this country dead. Beat it, beat it now, beat it until its dead, beat it until I can't hear its cries anymore.

I love how people always attempt some high and mighty arguments about their "inalienable freedoms". No one, I repeat NO ONE is telling you you're not allowed to smoke anymore. We're simply saying don't make me smoke along with you.

It's no different than having quiet hours after 10pm on weekdays... you can still blast your music, just not when most people want to sleep

If you want to take away my right to smoke in a bar, I'll fight to take away your right to go to bars.

Oh, wait, you don't have the right to go to a bar.

If you can guarantee that your smoke won't go anywhere else but yourself, you can smoke at the bar all you want. For a libertarian, you really lack that whole "your rights end where mine start" concept.

No. The problem is NOT with me.

You fail to realize two things. One, the owner of the bar has the right to decide whether or not to allow his customers to smoke. And, two, you do NOT have the right to go to any bar you want to. If you don't believe me, go to a popular bar in LA, wait in line to get in, and watch the bouncer tell you that you are too ugly or aren't dressed "correctly" to come into the bar.

My stance on this issue is very much in step with Libertarian belief.

Hardly,
try having a bar with "whites only" policy and see how quick you'll settle with the AG.
linkie

The same argument can be made for employers or housing providers and it's equally void. You don't have a full say into who you can or cannot bar from employing/dwelling.

BTW people that sympathize with Ron Paul are a bunch of misguided libertopians that lack in the Economics & Policy departments... hardly true Libertarians.

Define Libertarian please.

I my head, it is the belief that people have the inherent right to do anything they please, so long it doesn't negatively impact anyone else. Or, like I said before, your rights end where mine start.

The sad part is that Ron Paul nuts misconstrue being Libertarian into "Gubment can't tell me what to do" and follow through with deregulation of everything to pure free market, externalities or not.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre
I think the most dangerous thing second-hand smoke has ever done is cause people to lose respect for the ideals and beliefs of freedom and property rights.

The ideas of freedom were once something highly respected, something praised, held on a pedestal, something worth more than life itself. Something a terrorist with a bomb, nor a man with a gun, could take away. Rights that were inalienable.

But here we live in a time when people are so scared of death, they forget how to live. They don't know what living means anymore. As if its nothing more than being able to breathe air and pump blood.

If people are willing to toss away the beliefs and ideals that once made the USA great because of something so insignificant and so irrelevant as second-hand smoke, then I declare this country dead. Beat it, beat it now, beat it until its dead, beat it until I can't hear its cries anymore.

I love how people always attempt some high and mighty arguments about their "inalienable freedoms". No one, I repeat NO ONE is telling you you're not allowed to smoke anymore. We're simply saying don't make me smoke along with you.

It's no different than having quiet hours after 10pm on weekdays... you can still blast your music, just not when most people want to sleep

So, when you come over to MY bar are you going to ask me to turn down the music?

Shot and a miss... I will tell you turn your music down if you're in a residential zoned area and are blasting music past 10pm. Google "noise violations" ...

What's the difference between loud music in a bar and smoking in a bar?

The analogy was loud music in a residential area versus smoking at a bar. Both are nuisance to the people that aren't doing it, yet have to endure it anyhow. Once has been regulated, the other is in the process of being regulated.

Well, I am talking about loud music in a bar. What's the difference?

You can't get a bar zoning permit in a residential area... for that very reason? (loud music/late night)

 

[bamacre]

One of these days, I'm going to open a bar and I'll let everyone in except halik, and his lawyer can explain to him why I have the right not to let him in.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: bamacre
One of these days, I'm going to open a bar and I'll let everyone in except halik, and his lawyer can explain to him why I have the right not to let him in.

Because I'm black?

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre
I think the most dangerous thing second-hand smoke has ever done is cause people to lose respect for the ideals and beliefs of freedom and property rights.

The ideas of freedom were once something highly respected, something praised, held on a pedestal, something worth more than life itself. Something a terrorist with a bomb, nor a man with a gun, could take away. Rights that were inalienable.

But here we live in a time when people are so scared of death, they forget how to live. They don't know what living means anymore. As if its nothing more than being able to breathe air and pump blood.

If people are willing to toss away the beliefs and ideals that once made the USA great because of something so insignificant and so irrelevant as second-hand smoke, then I declare this country dead. Beat it, beat it now, beat it until its dead, beat it until I can't hear its cries anymore.

I love how people always attempt some high and mighty arguments about their "inalienable freedoms". No one, I repeat NO ONE is telling you you're not allowed to smoke anymore. We're simply saying don't make me smoke along with you.

It's no different than having quiet hours after 10pm on weekdays... you can still blast your music, just not when most people want to sleep

So, when you come over to MY bar are you going to ask me to turn down the music?

Shot and a miss... I will tell you turn your music down if you're in a residential zoned area and are blasting music past 10pm. Google "noise violations" ...

What's the difference between loud music in a bar and smoking in a bar?

The analogy was loud music in a residential area versus smoking at a bar. Both are nuisance to the people that aren't doing it, yet have to endure it anyhow. Once has been regulated, the other is in the process of being regulated.

Well, I am talking about loud music in a bar. What's the difference?

You can't get a bar zoning permit in a residential area... for that very reason? (loud music/late night)

What is the difference between allowing smokers in bars and loud music in bars? What is the difference?

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre
I think the most dangerous thing second-hand smoke has ever done is cause people to lose respect for the ideals and beliefs of freedom and property rights.

The ideas of freedom were once something highly respected, something praised, held on a pedestal, something worth more than life itself. Something a terrorist with a bomb, nor a man with a gun, could take away. Rights that were inalienable.

But here we live in a time when people are so scared of death, they forget how to live. They don't know what living means anymore. As if its nothing more than being able to breathe air and pump blood.

If people are willing to toss away the beliefs and ideals that once made the USA great because of something so insignificant and so irrelevant as second-hand smoke, then I declare this country dead. Beat it, beat it now, beat it until its dead, beat it until I can't hear its cries anymore.

I love how people always attempt some high and mighty arguments about their "inalienable freedoms". No one, I repeat NO ONE is telling you you're not allowed to smoke anymore. We're simply saying don't make me smoke along with you.

It's no different than having quiet hours after 10pm on weekdays... you can still blast your music, just not when most people want to sleep

If you want to take away my right to smoke in a bar, I'll fight to take away your right to go to bars.

Oh, wait, you don't have the right to go to a bar.

If you can guarantee that your smoke won't go anywhere else but yourself, you can smoke at the bar all you want. For a libertarian, you really lack that whole "your rights end where mine start" concept.

No. The problem is NOT with me.

You fail to realize two things. One, the owner of the bar has the right to decide whether or not to allow his customers to smoke. And, two, you do NOT have the right to go to any bar you want to. If you don't believe me, go to a popular bar in LA, wait in line to get in, and watch the bouncer tell you that you are too ugly or aren't dressed "correctly" to come into the bar.

My stance on this issue is very much in step with Libertarian belief.

Hardly,
try having a bar with "whites only" policy and see how quick you'll settle with the AG.
linkie

The same argument can be made for employers or housing providers and it's equally void. You don't have a full say into who you can or cannot bar from employing/dwelling.

BTW people that sympathize with Ron Paul are a bunch of misguided libertopians that lack in the Economics & Policy departments... hardly true Libertarians.

Define Libertarian please.

I my head, it is the belief that people have the inherent right to do anything they please, so long it doesn't negatively impact anyone else. Or, like I said before, your rights end where mine start.

The sad part is that Ron Paul nuts misconstrue being Libertarian into "Gubment can't tell me what to do" and follow through with deregulation of everything to pure free market, externalities or not.

Vic's previous response already answers this.

 

[halik]

Where and why do you keep coming up with loud music in a bar? Not only irrelevant, but a horrible analogy (that is if you're trying to parallel smoking with loud music). Music won't cause health problems and people aren't trying to sleep at the bar.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre
One of these days, I'm going to open a bar and I'll let everyone in except halik, and his lawyer can explain to him why I have the right not to let him in.

Because I'm black?

Nope. I will let all other blacks in. I would let everyone who wants to come in, do so. Except you. Your lawyer can even come in, and he can even open up a window so he can tell you why I don't have to let you in.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre
One of these days, I'm going to open a bar and I'll let everyone in except halik, and his lawyer can explain to him why I have the right not to let him in.

Because I'm black?

Nope. I will let all other blacks in. I would let everyone who wants to come in, do so. Except you. Your lawyer can even come in, and he can even open up a window so he can tell you why I don't have to let you in.

Heh that was a bit of a joke.... I'm from central europe. Regardless though, you do have the right to refuse service, but you can't systematically discriminate.

That little hypo doesn't take away from the veracity of my argument though, government has, does and will regulate public goods and externalities.... even if Ron Paul tells you otherwise.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: halik
Where and why do you keep coming up with loud music in a bar? Not only irrelevant, but a horrible analogy (that is if you're trying to parallel smoking with loud music). Music won't cause health problems and people aren't trying to sleep at the bar.

Loud music can't damage your hearing? Yes, it is relevant.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik
Where and why do you keep coming up with loud music in a bar? Not only irrelevant, but a horrible analogy (that is if you're trying to parallel smoking with loud music). Music won't cause health problems and people aren't trying to sleep at the bar.

Loud music can't damage your hearing? Yes, it is relevant.

Again virtually all cities have ordinance on how loud you can blast the music in your establishment, so even that is regulated... But I don't recall seeing anything that ties serious health problems (cancer) and related health care costs to loud music in bars.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik
Where and why do you keep coming up with loud music in a bar? Not only irrelevant, but a horrible analogy (that is if you're trying to parallel smoking with loud music). Music won't cause health problems and people aren't trying to sleep at the bar.

Loud music can't damage your hearing? Yes, it is relevant.

Again virtually all cities have ordinance on how loud you can blast the music in your establishment, so even that is regulated... But I don't recall seeing anything that ties serious health problems (cancer) and related health care costs to loud music in bars.

Kind of like how bars that allow smoking must have proper ventilation...

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik
Where and why do you keep coming up with loud music in a bar? Not only irrelevant, but a horrible analogy (that is if you're trying to parallel smoking with loud music). Music won't cause health problems and people aren't trying to sleep at the bar.

Loud music can't damage your hearing? Yes, it is relevant.

Again virtually all cities have ordinance on how loud you can blast the music in your establishment, so even that is regulated... But I don't recall seeing anything that ties serious health problems (cancer) and related health care costs to loud music in bars.

Kind of like how bars that allow smoking must have proper ventilation...

Hey if you can insure that smoke gets sucked away immediately ( think HEPA) and more importantly my clothes don't smell like shit the next day, you can smoke till it's coming out of your ears.

 

[marincounty]

AFAIK in California the law on smoking in bars and restaurants is based on the health of the employees. They don't care about the customers in the bar, it's for the health of the employees. If you are the owner you can decide to allow smoking, but as soon as you have employees you have to ban smoking.

Some smart owners have several partners in the bar, and allow smoking, since there are only owners, no employees.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik
Where and why do you keep coming up with loud music in a bar? Not only irrelevant, but a horrible analogy (that is if you're trying to parallel smoking with loud music). Music won't cause health problems and people aren't trying to sleep at the bar.

Loud music can't damage your hearing? Yes, it is relevant.

Again virtually all cities have ordinance on how loud you can blast the music in your establishment, so even that is regulated... But I don't recall seeing anything that ties serious health problems (cancer) and related health care costs to loud music in bars.

Kind of like how bars that allow smoking must have proper ventilation...

Hey if you can insure that smoke gets sucked away immediately ( think HEPA) and more importantly my clothes don't smell like shit the next day, you can smoke till it's coming out of your ears.

They better even make it better cause I don't want to go home smelling like booze either...

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: halik
I agree it's a zero sum game, but the difference is that smoking is a public BAD where as not smoking a public GOOD. Government is in the business of encouraging public GOODS and discouraging public BADs (Econ101).

And we're discussing bans in privately-owned establishments, not public buildings. The public has a choice as to whether or not they wish to patronage these privately-owned establishments. Particularly as many of these establishments have already done non-smoking all on their own, providing the public with more than adequate choice. Regulation is unnecessary.

edit: BTW you changed your argument.

Not sure where i switched the arugments...

But to the other thing, non-smokers visiting a smoking bar still creates a negative externality or hidden costs, which is what the ban would address.

I would absolutely agree with you if smoking bars would be packed with smokers and the opposite for non-smokers, but that's simple not the case. If your goal is to minimize the exposure of non-smokers to 2nd hand smoke, having a free market alternative is simply not working .

A risk they would then be knowingly taking upon themselves, as with a skydiver for example (that's where you changed your argument BTW).

And the free market alternative is working just fine... where it has been allowed to work. There is no smoking ban in my city and it's harder to find a smoking bar than non-smoking anymore. And those that still do allow smoking are pretty much the shitholes.
But in those areas that have banned smoking in bars, you gotta cross the gauntlet at the front door to get in, now don't you? We don't have those here.

But hey, great job with the "libertarian" straw man and then pulling out the race card for no reason at all... :roll:

 

[Satchel]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik
Where and why do you keep coming up with loud music in a bar? Not only irrelevant, but a horrible analogy (that is if you're trying to parallel smoking with loud music). Music won't cause health problems and people aren't trying to sleep at the bar.

Loud music can't damage your hearing? Yes, it is relevant.

Again virtually all cities have ordinance on how loud you can blast the music in your establishment, so even that is regulated... But I don't recall seeing anything that ties serious health problems (cancer) and related health care costs to loud music in bars.

Kind of like how bars that allow smoking must have proper ventilation...

Hey if you can insure that smoke gets sucked away immediately ( think HEPA) and more importantly my clothes don't smell like shit the next day, you can smoke till it's coming out of your ears.

Now you're finally being honest. When do we start making laws to ban everything else that annoys you?

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: Sawyer
Banned smoking at a cigar bar? You have got to be shittin me [face_disbelief]

Dude, people who don't smoke want to go to the cigar bar too!

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: Satchel

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: halik
Where and why do you keep coming up with loud music in a bar? Not only irrelevant, but a horrible analogy (that is if you're trying to parallel smoking with loud music). Music won't cause health problems and people aren't trying to sleep at the bar.

Loud music can't damage your hearing? Yes, it is relevant.

Again virtually all cities have ordinance on how loud you can blast the music in your establishment, so even that is regulated... But I don't recall seeing anything that ties serious health problems (cancer) and related health care costs to loud music in bars.

Kind of like how bars that allow smoking must have proper ventilation...

Hey if you can insure that smoke gets sucked away immediately ( think HEPA) and more importantly my clothes don't smell like shit the next day, you can smoke till it's coming out of your ears.

Now you're finally being honest. When do we start making laws to ban everything else that annoys you?

Exactly. And who is the bigger idiot here? The smoker who knows that smoking is bad but chooses to do it anyway or the non-smoker who hates second-hand smoke and the smell of smokey clothing but chooses to go to a smoking bar?

I think that's a pretty damn easy question to answer. If the establishment owner wants to allow people to smoke in their building then more power to them. This nanny state BS has got to stop. Public welfare? Greater good? Get the eff off my lawn man.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: Sawyer
Banned smoking at a cigar bar? You have got to be shittin me [face_disbelief]

Dude, people who don't smoke want to go to the cigar bar too!

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: bamacre
One of these days, I'm going to open a bar and I'll let everyone in except halik, and his lawyer can explain to him why I have the right not to let him in.

Because I'm black?

Nope. I will let all other blacks in. I would let everyone who wants to come in, do so. Except you. Your lawyer can even come in, and he can even open up a window so he can tell you why I don't have to let you in.

Heh that was a bit of a joke.... I'm from central europe. Regardless though, you do have the right to refuse service, but you can't systematically discriminate.

That little hypo doesn't take away from the veracity of my argument though, government has, does and will regulate public goods and externalities.... even if Ron Paul tells you otherwise.

Understanding the fact that you do not have the right to go to a bar is the first step in understanding my stance on this issue.

Congrats. We can now continue.

 

[desy]

Actually smoking bans I don't have a problem with.
Occupational Health and Safety and the rights of workers trumped private ownership as their employees were exposed to health hazards